Stinger 2.0 performance

[kielbasa]

Ok.....i stand corrected from earlier post......i still believe it is quicker than 7.5s (the video driver did not seem to really "stand on it" from the start) but i "assumed" that your comments were based upon "after mods".....

I actually reffered to the stock cars. But just going further, wouldn't ever suppose that if You can't make it in less than 7.5sec on stock 255bhp, how it's possible to make it in 5sec on a 300bhp, having only 50bhp more. It were just my idle speculations.
But You guys already said it's possible.
If anyone had a film, would be great to see the results.

 

[Jayphil]

I agree about how the Stinger was designed, how it handles and drives. This is thanks to the designers from BMW (Albert B) and Audi (Peter S.) who joined Kia a few years ago. Those who buy the Accords and Camrys, Camaros and Chargers have no idea or they simply can't get over the Kia name and Badge. I owned a 2006 BMW 330i and 2011 335i and the Stinger is as good or even better than those 2 cars. I'm kind of enjoying the "exclusivity" of not seeing a Stinger as much I do as Nissan Altimas. Maybe Kia will need to branch off the Stinger and Telluride with a different name like Hyundai did with Genesis. Either way, I am content with the Stinger 2.0t with added performance and flair.

I sure hope that the Stinger is as good or better than the 3 series you had since they are based on a very old (before 2006) platform. I would say that the Stinger are closer to the F platform ( one platform behind) but still not on part with the G. Still a very good achievement for Kia because the F platform is still very good based on today’s standards!

now Kia knows that they need to skip a generation and be on top of the game with EV platform thought...

 

[monusa]

I actually reffered to the stock cars. But just going further, wouldn't ever suppose that if You can't make it in less than 7.5sec on stock 255bhp, how it's possible to make it in 5sec on a 300bhp, having only 50bhp more

So..........there are a great many factors involved in putting power to the road......so let's just say a stock 2.0 is 7 sec. 0-60. if i add the JB4 and plugs running MAP1(default map out of the box), i have just altered the spark advance, spark fire, and boost control which is going to shave serious time compared to the stock values for the aforementioned characteristics (spark advance, boost, etc......). should i build upon those "modified" characteristics by adding premium fuel, reduction of weight, more efficient K&N intake plumbing, and a jb4 bump to MAP3, I am going to shave even more time off the 0-60. this is all i am saying......of course stock is not going to get there because that is not how the car was setup from the factory. Even the GT folks will tell you this.....i can add an extra 200HP but if i can't get the darn power to the road......i am going to be just like the Hemi Charges/Challengers.......lot of horsepower but can't put it to the road.....those things should be sub 4.0 sec. cars easy!!!!1

 

[kielbasa]

Does any of You have any recorded attemps with 0-100 on modded 2.0 ?

 

[monusa]

i could give you data all day long but i am not going to "waist" $150 on a "Dragy" to show it.

 

[kielbasa]

Those of You who stated specific times must have checked them somehow, so I'm only asking if they have any films.

 

[monusa]

speaking for me, i have no answer(or video) other than i get the performance out of the 2.0 that i was looking for after adding the few mods that i have. Others may be interested in more and my answer to them is go as far as you feel comfortable in going(just be mindful of durability) but i am not going any further than i have because i still intend on upgrading to the 3.3.....BTW, did some reading and both R&T and MT tested the 2.0 and reported, "in print", that they achieved 0-60 in 6.1.....bout where i placed it during my test drive.

 

[Sunseeker]

I know it's been a while but I finally decided to go from the Racechip RS to the JB4. Huge difference between the two. Of course the Racechip RS is not the Black GTS, but the JB4 has taken my 2.0 to a whole new level!!! I didn't stay long on Map 1 because I was already running 93 octane so I changed to Map 2 and can honestly tell you that the car is now a beast! My car was already fast, but I did not expect that much improvement. The pull and acceleration is crazy...i kid you not. The car with the Racechip had slight lulls between shifts. With the JB4, the acceleration is smooth with no lulls during acceleration.....and it keeps pulling and pulling with no pause or drop. I get a little nervous and have to let off the accelerator. I believe that the JB4 amplifies and makes better use of my modifications than the Racechip (Race spark plugs, full race custom catback exhaust, injen intake and XLR throttle controller). I'm going to get a Dyno on Map 0, 1 and 2 to see where I stand. What I can feel now was unimaginable. I have no doubt that stock STIs, Charger and Challenger RTs and more will not hang with this car. I don't believe I'm far off from the 3.3 now. Will get the Dyno done and go from there.

 

[kielbasa]

Share with us Your results when You make dyno tests.

 

[monusa]

................and include LOGS when you change maps. Can't express enough how important to make sure everything is playing "nice" or else, "problems".

Send a couple to Terry and let him evaluate.

 

[Sunseeker]

Here is the Dyno from today. Only Map 0 and Map 3 printed out on chart. On Map 0, this tells me that my mods alone are making 232 whp (57 degrees temp). Map 2 was not on the chart, but was 240 whp. Map 3 on the chart made 263 peak whp and 287 wtq....both now higher at the wheels than stock crank numbers of 255 hp and 260 tq. Not sure if I will try higher Maps, but I may get close or match stock GT numbers with e85 mix or WMI and fuel control.

 

[Oryan]

Here is the Dyno from today. Only Map 0 and Map 3 printed out on chart. On Map 0, this tells me that my mods alone are making 232 whp (57 degrees temp). Map 2 was not on the chart, but was 240 whp. Map 3 on the chart made 263 peak whp and 287 wtq....both now higher at the wheels than stock crank numbers of 255 hp and 260 tq. Not sure if I will try higher Maps, but I may get close or match stock GT numbers with e85 mix or WMI and fuel control.View attachment 54169

Unless I'm reading this wrong, something isn't adding up.

Ignoring the HP curve below about 5200, those curves make sense. The stock one hits peak power around there and then tapers off, which is what I'd expect for a stock turbo car. Then, the tuned one apparently is building power almost up to redline and you'll be shifting before that anyway so that's fine. Actually, that's good, in of itself.

But the torque curves and peak numbers don't make sense in that regard. The stock turbo reports a WTQ peak of about 232 but neither curve has a peak that low. I see the curve with a peak of 287, but then it drops off like a rock...arguably too much to still be building HP like the higher HP curve is. Honestly the lower peak, more bold curve looks better to me because it stays flat longer...and if that's the stock torque curve I'm really confused as to how HP is going down. The peak is lower but torque over time is how you get higher HP, and how you actually go faster. That 287 may hit harder and make the butt-dyno happy but I wouldn't be surprised at all if hypothetically, a car with that other torque band lined up and was as fast, or possibly faster than the car with a wall of low-end torque. One car would blast ahead initially and then as you got up to speed and gears got longer, it would get reeled in and probably pulled on.

 

[Sunseeker]

I'm not sure either, but you're right about the butt Dyno. The HP builds sharp from 3500 to just over 4k rpm in the graph and holds steady (over 250 whp) past 6000 rpm. Strange thing is....when I approach 80+ (some freeways in Texas post 85), the car pulls harder! I still have the video where I walked down a Mustang Ecoboost twice with 310 hp and 350 TQ going WOT....and that was only with the Racechip RS at 232-235 whp.

 

[Daniel @ K8 Stinger Store]

So what is everyone's go to site for performance parts for the 2.0? Not lookin for anything crazy. Maybe a mild stage 2. A tune. Cold air. Intercooler. Down pipe/exhaust.

We have one of the largest selections of 2.0T and 3.3T aftermarket parts available on the web. I would be glad to help answer any questions you have about any of the parts that we sell or get you a discount on an order from our site.

You can check us out at: www.K8StingerStore.com

 

[Darrell234]

The best performance upgrade for a 2.0 Stinger is to trade it for a 3.3 Stinger. The V6 Stinger is the only way to get real performance with a Stinger.

I have a 2.0 stinger with jb4 , intake , bov , intercooler , ark exhaust and deadass be beating the 3.3

 

[Jayphil]

I have a 2.0 stinger with jb4 , intake , bov , intercooler , ark exhaust and deadass be beating the 3.3

I yet to see any modified 2.0t beating a stock 3.3t dyno whp numbers , draggy 1/4 mile runs or real track 1/4 mile.
Prove us you can do 13s flat 1/4 mile time and we will agree with you that you may equal some stock 3.3 Stingers ( some are even in the 12s)

 

[monusa]

I yet to see any modified 2.0t beating a stock 3.3t dyno whp numbers , draggy 1/4 mile runs or real track 1/4 mile.
Prove us you can do 13s flat 1/4 mile time and we will agree with you that you may equal some stock 3.3 Stingers ( some are even in the 12s)

Really doing this again.....

As a "former" 2.0 owner, I would be slightly upset but my choice to get the 2.0 had nothing to do with beating the GT......can't speak for "Darrell234" as his reasons may be totally different. It will take some major effort and a few dollars to get close to a stock GT BUT, that effort and amount of dollars reduces DRAMATICALLY with the 2.5....

Just saying.....waiting on the 2.5 with similar mods as "Darrell234" to see how this type of conversation goes......

 

[Sunseeker]

I yet to see any modified 2.0t beating a stock 3.3t dyno whp numbers , draggy 1/4 mile runs or real track 1/4 mile.
Prove us you can do 13s flat 1/4 mile time and we will agree with you that you may equal some stock 3.3 Stingers ( some are even in the 12s)

I have not seen any numbers yet from a 2.0 beating a stock 3.3 yet, but it is very possible. My 2.0 is at 337hp just on JB4 Map 3 and timed 4.9 secs zero to sixty. Running Map 5 with Boostane tells me I'm around 350hp. I'm certain that I could match the stock 3.3 running WMI or E30. If I added an upgraded intercooler like Darrell234....i would certainly be beating stock 3.3s with reduced weight being the deciding factor (I have lighter rims than stock, replaced my donut spare with a can of green slime, lighter exhaust and two less cylinders).

 

[Jayphil]

Really doing this again.....

As a "former" 2.0 owner, I would be slightly upset but my choice to get the 2.0 had nothing to do with beating the GT......can't speak for "Darrell234" as his reasons may be totally different. It will take some major effort and a few dollars to get close to a stock GT BUT, that effort and amount of dollars reduces DRAMATICALLY with the 2.5....

Just saying.....waiting on the 2.5 with similar mods as "Darrell234" to see how this type of conversation goes......

I was just replying to his message because if the way it was written . I am not really in 2.0t vs 3.3t war. If I had a 2.0t I would be modding it to be faster regardless of if it would or not match 3.3t performance.

I have not seen any numbers yet from a 2.0 beating a stock 3.3 yet, but it is very possible. My 2.0 is at 337hp just on JB4 Map 3 and timed 4.9 secs zero to sixty. Running Map 5 with Boostane tells me I'm around 350hp. I'm certain that I could match the stock 3.3 running WMI or E30. If I added an upgraded intercooler like Darrell234....i would certainly be beating stock 3.3s with reduced weight being the deciding factor (I have lighter rims than stock, replaced my donut spare with a can of green slime, lighter exhaust and two less cylinders).

Great achievement so far that would be great to see more draggy or dyno from 2.0t but I guess it is a very limited market.

 

[Sunseeker]

I was just replying to his message because if the way it was written . I am not really in 2.0t vs 3.3t war. If I had a 2.0t I would be modding it to be faster regardless of if it would or not match 3.3t performance.

Great achievement so far that would be great to see more draggy or dyno from 2.0t but I guess it is a very limited market.

Here is my last dyno again with JB4 on Map 3, Shell 93 octane. Peak 263 whp & 287 wtq. From 4700 to 6300 rpm...whp is over 250 (near stock bhp #'s). Map 5 with Boostane....pulls much much harder. Will get a Map 5 or e30/e85 Dyno later.